Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41155019›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Breast Cancer Prediction Using Rotation Forest Algorithm Along with Finding the Influential Causes.

Prosenjit Das, Proshenjit Sarker, Jun-Jiat Tiang, Abdullah-Al Nahid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Prosenjit DasElectronics and Communication Engineering Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna 9208, Bangladesh.ORCID 0009-0006-7391-6134
Proshenjit SarkerElectronics and Communication Engineering Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna 9208, Bangladesh.ORCID 0009-0008-9502-2152
Jun-Jiat TiangCentre for Wireless Technology, CoE for Intelligent Network, Faculty of Artificial Intelligence & Engineering, Multimedia University, Persiaran Multimedia, Cyberjaya 63100, Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-1178-9356
Abdullah-Al NahidElectronics and Communication Engineering Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna 9208, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0003-2391-5767

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is a widespread disease involving abnormal (uncontrolled) growth of breast tissue cells along with the formation of a tumor and metastasis. Breast cancer cases occur mostly among women. Early detection and regular screening have significantly improved survival rates. This research classifies breast cancer and non-breast cancer cases using machine learning algorithms based on the Breast Cancer Coimbra dataset by optimizing the classifier performance and feature selection methodology. In addition, this research identifies the influential features responsible for BC classification by using diverse counterfactual explanations. The Rotation Forest classifier algorithm is used to classify breast cancer and non-breast cancer cases. The hyperparameters of this algorithm are optimized using the Optuna optimizer. Three wrapper-based feature selection techniques (Sequential Forward Selection, Sequential Backward Selection, and Exhaustive Feature Selection) are used to select the most relevant features. An ensemble environment is also created using the best feature subsets of these methods, incorporating both soft and hard voting strategies. Experimental results show that the hard voting strategy achieves an accuracy of 85.71%, F1-score of 83.87%, precision of 92.85%, and recall of 76.47%. In contrast, the soft voting strategy obtains an accuracy of 80.00%, F1-score of 77.42%, precision of 85.71%, and recall of 70.59%. These findings demonstrate that hard voting achieves noticeably better performance. The misclassification outcomes of both strategies are explored using Diverse Counterfactual Explanations, revealing that BMI and Glucose values are most influential in predicting correct classes, whereas the HOMA, Adiponectin, and Resistin values have little influence.

Indexed as

breast cancercounterfactual analysisensemble voting classifierOptunarotation forestwrapper method

Identifiers

PMID41155019
PMCPMC12561878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.